Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Even as a going concern haven't Rangers said, and the guy's statement this morning also confirmed, that Rangers weren't actually part of this deal so couldn't be held to it?

But Rangers got the cash... which was used to pay off Lloyds... so they were actually part of the deal. So someone...be it Ticketus or CW.... is entitled to get it back somehow, be that in cash or the sale of future season tickets.

[Beefster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Even as a going concern haven't Rangers said, and the guy's statement this morning also confirmed, that Rangers weren't actually part of this deal so couldn't be held to it?

He said that Whyte had claimed that Rangers had no liability to Ticketus but King also said that the administrators would need to confirm this.

To be fair, Whyte's been caught out lying about almost everything so this could easily turn out to be pish too.

[The_Sauz]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

shhhh... this thread is just a rehearsal for THAT little event.

As Capitan Jean-Luc Picard would say "Make it so!"

[Elephant Stone]

Anybody know what would happen if they were liquidated before the big tax case?

[BEEJ]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Away from St Mirren's comment, just read the Duff and Phelps statement - how can they sell the club without knowing the result of the 'big' tax case. If that goes as expected, wouldn't that just force them into administration again?

Any offer for the club would be made conditional upon the outcome of the HMRC case.

And, if accepted on that basis, that would have the effect of placing more pressure on the HMRC decision.

[The_Sauz]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

There is a wonderful error on Sky Sports News just now stating that "rangers director Paul King states liquidation is inevitable'......seeing as that's my name it makes for some lovely viewing.

Well my real name is Paul Clark (by the way...Rangers would have been dead & buried by now )

[HibbyAndy]

Rangers are finito like.

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Anybody know what would happen if they were liquidated before the big tax case?

Can't see that happening, TBH.

If they went into liquidation tomorrow, it would take a while to sell off the assets, by which time the BTC verdict would be in.

In any event, HMRC would put in claim to the liquidator to cover the BTC, on the basis of their original assessment. If they won the case, their claim would be processed like any other creditor. If they lost, their claim would be consequently reduced.

[blindsummit]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

"The manager, Ally McCoist will play an integral part in these discussions. If however it becomes apparent that the sale process cannot be accelerated there will be no choice but to implement very severe cost cutting measures at the club."

http://sport.stv.tv/football/scottis...-action-taken/

Which should have happened on day one! This has been a long drawn out farce.

[Andy74]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

But Rangers got the cash... which was used to pay off Lloyds... so they were actually part of the deal. So someone...be it Ticketus or CW.... is entitled to get it back somehow, be that in cash or the sale of future season tickets.

Not so sure. CW got the cash and he paid Lloyds. I think Ticketus are entitled to believe they should get season tickets out of it but Rangers might well be able to blank them and point them towards CW. Ticketus appear to have been daft to deal with someone who wasn't Rangers at the time so they might well have to pursue CW over this one.

That's just one guess from what I can make out of this though and I'll bet Rangers are trying to look at it this way!

[Lucius Apuleius]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You saying that we're wrong? (square go??? )

But, given the complex nature of what appears to be a Yammish contract in your case, my considered opinion is that you are indeed rubber ducked.

Come and have a go if you think you're hard enough!!!!!!

I should state, it is not me who is rubber ducked, it is the guys I am rubber ducking

[Togs91]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

A desire from a number of the first team squad to have clauses inserted in their contracts, which would see them leave in the summer for free or for a "reasonable" price, is understood to have led to the impasse. A statement from co-administrator David Whitehouse said: "The club is in a perilous financial situation and that should not be under-estimated.

They don't do walking away

Does this then mean that, if rangers did arrange paycuts, and played the rest of their fixtures, that they would have NO choice but to get rip of practically every high earning player in the club?

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Which should have happened on day one! This has been a long drawn out farce.

Nope. Can't agree. See any one of my many posts on this.

[blindsummit]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Nope. Can't agree. See any one of my many posts on this.

I know mate, I just can't help myself. my desire to see them die screaming in agony is too strong

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Not so sure. CW got the cash and he paid Lloyds. I think Ticketus are entitled to believe they should get season tickets out of it but Rangers might well be able to blank them and point them towards CW. Ticketus appear to have been daft to deal with someone who wasn't Rangers at the time so they might well have to pursue CW over this one.

That's just one guess from what I can make out of this though and I'll bet Rangers are trying to look at it this way!

Can't agree. Rangers got the benefit of the Ticketus cash, in that their overdraft was paid off. They are either due Ticketus that cash, or CW... in which case the whole spectre of CW's security looms again. AFAIK, the admins have rejected that possibility.

[Hibs Class]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

They are in a very difficult position there.

If they do that, said players can sue for the remaining portion of their contract. A smart lawyer would apply to have funds in RFC ring-fenced (as Martin Bain, I think, did), pending the Court case. That would just get us back to the same position, if not worse.

Thought one of the elements of administration was the prevention of creditors being able to take court action and effectively create a preference for themselves?

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I know mate, I just can't help myself. my desire to see them die screaming in agony is too strong

*******... all you managed there was an increase in my blood pressure

[HibeeMG]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Can't see that happening, TBH.

If they went into liquidation tomorrow, it would take a while to sell off the assets, by which time the BTC verdict would be in.

In any event, HMRC would put in claim to the liquidator to cover the BTC, on the basis of their original assessment. If they won the case, their claim would be processed like any other creditor. If they lost, their claim would be consequently reduced.

I know this has been asked before but I couldn't see an answer - when is the BTC verdict likely?

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Thought one of the elements of administration was the prevention of creditors being able to take court action and effectively create a preference for themselves?

Good point. But Amanda Jones was quite clear on this last night. Employment law doesn't stop applying just because there is an administration, and players would have the right to sue.

Whether they could have funds ring-fenced, though, as I suggested... not sure. But it does seem that Employment Law trumps most things here. Hence the stand-off over the past few days.

[ancienthibby]

New statement coming out from Duffers and (Please)Helpus:

Our client will not play in Europe next year.



Link:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17285309

[blindsummit]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

*******... all you managed there was an increase in my blood pressure

Imagine what your blood pressure might do if they DO die! I know my heart might burst with the sheer joy of it

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I know this has been asked before but I couldn't see an answer - when is the BTC verdict likely?

Fuctifano

I wish they'd bloody hurry up... it's the key to the whole thing, IMO.

It is imminent, but I have heard March, and I have heard April. The Tribunal will be taking their time, because they know the importance of their decision. Whatever they decide will have consequences far beyond Govan.

[Andy74]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Can't agree. Rangers got the benefit of the Ticketus cash, in that their overdraft was paid off. They are either due Ticketus that cash, or CW... in which case the whole spectre of CW's security looms again. AFAIK, the admins have rejected that possibility.

I think as far as Rangers are aware they got the benefit of cash from CW, doesn't matter to them where from and he chose to pay off Lloyds.

Isn't that just gone and paid though - why would CW be looking for that or entitled to that back now? Unless he paid it as a loan to the club who then paid Lloyds.

I think Ticketus are going to struggle with this one and if anything CW is on the line for it.

Edit: Administrators saying they are still looking into this.

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think as far as Rangers are aware they got the benefit of cash from CW, doesn't matter to them where from and he chose to pay off Lloyds.

Isn't that just gone and paid though - why would CW be looking for that or entitled to that back now? Unless he paid it as a loan to the club who then paid Lloyds.

I think Ticketus are going to struggle with this one and if anything CW is on the line for it.

Although we disagree on how we get there, I would agree that, in practice, it's unlikely that Ticketus will get anything from RFC. Even if their claim is admitted by the admins or a liquidator:-

1. there will be no CVA. Even if there was one, the dividend would be pennies.

2. if the club is sold on, the buyer would probably say "I don't want the Ticketus debt". If the admins agree to that, Ticketus get nowt.

3. in a liquidation, it's back to 1 above, although selling off the assets would probably increase the dividend.

[shagpile]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

New statement coming out from Duffers and (Please)Helpus:

Our client will not play in Europe next year.



Link:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17285309

Same as this year then.

[HFC 0-7]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Fuctifano

I wish they'd bloody hurry up... it's the key to the whole thing, IMO.

It is imminent, but I have heard March, and I have heard April. The Tribunal will be taking their time, because they know the importance of their decision. Whatever they decide will have consequences far beyond Govan.

Can you see the decision go in rangers favour? If it did would it not just mean every club in the uk would adopt the same scheme and start paying their players via ebt's? Or is it now a case of hmrc having proof that it happened on the way claimed?

[Wembley67]

So after 90 pages has a conclusion been drawn?! Does no one work around here!

Sent from the i****ter

[Caversham Green]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Although we disagree on how we get there, I would agree that, in practice, it's unlikely that Ticketus will get anything from RFC. Even if their claim is admitted by the admins or a liquidator:-

1. there will be no CVA. Even if there was one, the dividend would be pennies.

2. if the club is sold on, the buyer would probably say "I don't want the Ticketus debt". If the admins agree to that, Ticketus get nowt.

3. in a liquidation, it's back to 1 above, although selling off the assets would probably increase the dividend.

One point about the Ticketus deal - on the face of it there is no debt due to them either by RFC or CW. Rangers/CW have sold Ticketus a commodity (future ticket sales) at an agreed price, and that price has been paid over. The fact that that commodity might now have no value is Ticketus' bad luck - that's what investment is all about. They may have a claim for misrepresentation (probably against CW) if there's no events to sell tickets for, but in theory at least there's no monetary debt at the moment. I can't see that prospective buyers can change that, they can only reduce the amount they are willing to pay for the club.

[The_Sauz]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

So after 90 pages has a conclusion been drawn?! Does no one work around here!

Sent from the i****ter

On holiday

[HibeeMG]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Fuctifano

I wish they'd bloody hurry up... it's the key to the whole thing, IMO.

It is imminent, but I have heard March, and I have heard April. The Tribunal will be taking their time, because they know the importance of their decision. Whatever they decide will have consequences far beyond Govan.

Fair do's. Thanks for the honest answer!

Yeah, I wish they'd hurry up also. Does anyone know how much notice we'd get of a decision being made? I might just book that day off!